Slashdot Mirror

via the original wired article..: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.11/persinger.html?pg=1&topic=&topic_set=

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.11/patton.html?pg=1

And note this was published in Wired in *1995*. Nice Googlestalking there, folks....

Your estimate of Ms. Thomas' income is fairly close. In another article she indicated she makes $36,000 per year. She also has two children.

I don't know where your calculations on the loan payments came from but they aren't working out right for me (although they are relatively close).

Assuming the federal rate remained at 4.05% through the life of the loan, she would need to pay $27,035.05 per year. She has two children so the poverty level for her family is $17,170 per year. I'm not up to calculating her taxes so I'll just take your estimate that she can contribute $27,311.36 per year which means she could pay it off in just under ten years.

Ms. Thomas is 30 years old so she would have 25 years to save for retirement. Also note the interest rate is likely to climb. At 10%, it would take her 17 years. At 12.3% it would take her 70 years. And at 12.4% she would never be able to pay it. Finally, I believe there is a limit on how long a judgment is valid. I don't think any judgments are valid past 20 years. So she would have at least 15 years to save for retirement.

Assuming all disposable income is funneled to repaying her debt to society

This is a civil suit. She would be repaying her debt to the record labels.

Haven't heard from you in a while McBride, cat got your tounge?

WN: You knew you'd be vilified?

McBride: In this particular case we're talking about, I joined the company, and we had problems with our intellectual property.... I said we should protect our rights.... The former CEO said, if you do that, you will be vilified by the Linux community. The Linux community will attack you. You will be hated. Don't go down that path.

Well that's not a reason to not step up and defend your property. That's not a reason to stand back and say, "I'm not going to fight." We got attacked, vilified and we got branded as pariahs. When you pay 149 million dollars for a property, do you have the right to defend it or not? I think it's a matter of principle. I think anybody in their right mind who was in my position would have done the same thing if they had half a backbone.

Wasn't there a case this year and a law passed where phone could legally be unlocked by the consumer. Cell phones and printers

I guess it's because we do not have all the answers to their technology.

LOL! Ask the Israelis about the effectiveness of Russian air defenses. It is barely worth the effort to blow up Russian military technology anymore.

I wonder what kind of tools they are using when they bomb my car. When I was reporting about an attempt to map Redwood National Park with LIDAR, a flock of seagulls flew behind the Aero Commander plane that I was photographing. They were flying in a formation that looked like a giant bird: http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/10/birds.jpg I love showing that to people. I am so glad that I caught it on film. Unfortunately, I missed the best shot of all time. I was standing on the side of the road with a camera in my hand when some guy pulled up to a stop light and proceeded to smoke some weed through an apple.

Could be...

What is now becoming clear is that many unlocked phones come through the upgrade unbricked, albeit re-locked. Considering that recognizing an unlocked phone should be a simple matter of a checksum, it seems clear that Apple was not intentionally "bricking" phones. There are reasons to believe that this is likely an unintended side effect of an update designed primarily to enhance iPhone security. If it was not intentional, Apple is in the clear, as they are under no legal obligation to debug an update to work with phones that have been modified in violation of warranty. And indeed, it seems that while Apple is under no legal obligation to do so, Apple sotres are restoring "bricked" iPhones. Moreover, it is not as if Apple failed to warn owners of unlocked iPhones that applying the update would likely harm their phones.

First, thanks for a great site. I read something about "20 hour days" keeping the site afloat, and I believe it was required. For those of us who enjoy it daily (along with Dwight Silverman's column) it can be a real lifeline, especially when work is ultra-boring.

Just a few questions:

1. You oversaw the "internet revolution." Beyond Al Gore inventing it, beyond the dot-com hype, beyond the spam and the sockpuppets, what do you think is the future of networked communication? Is it the cloud OS and social networking, or are we rounding another bend?

2. You've mentioned liking Postgres DBs. What other underrated hardware and software do you enjoy and employ on a regular basis?

3. What emergent technologies do you watch?

4. In the Wired interview, you mention a balance between wise crowd tendencies and dumb crowd tendencies:

"When you're building a system like this you're balancing the wisdom of the crowds versus the tyranny of the mob. Sometimes a crowd is really smart, but some things don't work so well by committee. Crowds work when you have a tightly knit group of people with similar interests, but when you have a loosely knit community you get 'Man Gets Hit in Crotch With Football.'"

What have you learned is the balance of this duality? For all of its attempts to be crowd-wisdom propelled, Slashdot does lean on the theory of exceptional individuals, because it has picked editors to filter what makes it to the front page, which cuts down on the "site-rhymes-with-bigg" tendency to put rosy garbage on the front page. Are you satisfied with the balance of your responses to whatever psychological fulcrum keeps a crowd wise and not mobbish?

5. What if any fiction authors do you enjoy?

6. I'm a technical writer, and am curious what you think about the current state of software and hardware documentation. Is it getting better? What are its common failings? Does anyone read it? Will single-sourcing (documentation that appears in print, online help, web sites, flash cards and text messages but uses the same text) change documentation's effectiveness radically?

7. In the CNET article, you talk about Slashdot as a community.

"But to some of our readers, it's a community that's here to discuss issues that are relevant to this community. There is a lot of value. The bulk of our content comes from other people. There are 6,000 or 7,000 comments on a busy day that other people write and just a dozen stories of just a paragraph or two that we actually generate, that are ours."

As you started out in BBSs, you probably had a prexisting idea of this being important to a resource on technology. Why do you think this is?

8. In the same interview, you talk about the ability of low-tech websites to take on big roles:

"I think that it really comes down to the content. If you have content people want, they will tolerate a system that is inferior. Now our system is solid, but back in the day, it wasn't. Look at eBay: That system is the most hodgepodge and clumsy user interface that you will ever find. People use it because it was first and it worked."

In the world of advertising, people call this branding. What do you think Slashdot's brand represents, and is it something IT workers will always have in common?

9. In the Network Administrator interview, you compare Slashdot to bulletin board systems favorably.

"Strangely not that far. It's all just a matter of scale. At some level it's all identical."

You mean in twenty years, not much has changed except the technology? I'd like to hear more on this if you find it compelling.

10.

First, thanks for a great site. I read something about "20 hour days" keeping the site afloat, and I believe it was required. For those of us who enjoy it daily (along with Dwight Silverman's column) it can be a real lifeline, especially when work is ultra-boring.

Just a few questions:

1. You oversaw the "internet revolution." Beyond Al Gore inventing it, beyond the dot-com hype, beyond the spam and the sockpuppets, what do you think is the future of networked communication? Is it the cloud OS and social networking, or are we rounding another bend?

2. You've mentioned liking Postgres DBs. What other underrated hardware and software do you enjoy and employ on a regular basis?

3. What emergent technologies do you watch?

4. In the Wired interview, you mention a balance between wise crowd tendencies and dumb crowd tendencies:

"When you're building a system like this you're balancing the wisdom of the crowds versus the tyranny of the mob. Sometimes a crowd is really smart, but some things don't work so well by committee. Crowds work when you have a tightly knit group of people with similar interests, but when you have a loosely knit community you get 'Man Gets Hit in Crotch With Football.'"

What have you learned is the balance of this duality? For all of its attempts to be crowd-wisdom propelled, Slashdot does lean on the theory of exceptional individuals, because it has picked editors to filter what makes it to the front page, which cuts down on the "site-rhymes-with-bigg" tendency to put rosy garbage on the front page. Are you satisfied with the balance of your responses to whatever psychological fulcrum keeps a crowd wise and not mobbish?

5. What if any fiction authors do you enjoy?

6. I'm a technical writer, and am curious what you think about the current state of software and hardware documentation. Is it getting better? What are its common failings? Does anyone read it? Will single-sourcing (documentation that appears in print, online help, web sites, flash cards and text messages but uses the same text) change documentation's effectiveness radically?

7. In the CNET article, you talk about Slashdot as a community.

"But to some of our readers, it's a community that's here to discuss issues that are relevant to this community. There is a lot of value. The bulk of our content comes from other people. There are 6,000 or 7,000 comments on a busy day that other people write and just a dozen stories of just a paragraph or two that we actually generate, that are ours."

As you started out in BBSs, you probably had a prexisting idea of this being important to a resource on technology. Why do you think this is?

8. In the same interview, you talk about the ability of low-tech websites to take on big roles:

"I think that it really comes down to the content. If you have content people want, they will tolerate a system that is inferior. Now our system is solid, but back in the day, it wasn't. Look at eBay: That system is the most hodgepodge and clumsy user interface that you will ever find. People use it because it was first and it worked."

In the world of advertising, people call this branding. What do you think Slashdot's brand represents, and is it something IT workers will always have in common?

9. In the Network Administrator interview, you compare Slashdot to bulletin board systems favorably.

"Strangely not that far. It's all just a matter of scale. At some level it's all identical."

You mean in twenty years, not much has changed except the technology? I'd like to hear more on this if you find it compelling.

10.

> Show me where the RIAA or anyone or any agency protecting copyrights has
> ever suggested ripping violates copyrights

That's a nicely crafted, self-serving and limited statement. If it weren't
so blatantly dishonest I might even admire you for it. It's a great example
of well crafted "bad rhetoric". I might even send it along to my high school
rhetoric teacher so he can use it as an example.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/sony-bmg-exec-t.html

I support copyright as it was in 1970.

Draconian measures for the real bootleggers.
Leaving the customers the hell alone.
Limited copyright terms.
Copying tools aren't illegal.
Fair use is preserved.

There is an interesting and surprisingly in depth article on Bungie and how they went about developing for Halo 3. They follow Bungie's development process and get into things like how Bungie solved different AI problems etc. Anyway when you have some free time, it's 6 pages long, hop over to http://www.wired.com/gaming/virtualworlds/magazine/15-09/ff_halo and give it a read. Btw I don't own an Xbox and never played Halo but I still found the article very interesting.

Ever since GiS went away you've become a sort of man-behind-the curtain type persona, and we don't see much in the way of journal updates or news posts about Slashdot or you yoyrself much. One of the last things most of us knew about the "Real Rob Malda" was the article in Wired years ago regarding the Andover-cum-VALinux-cum-OSDN-cum-Death-keiretsu IPO.

Just what the hell do you do all day now, anyway?

In the recent Wired interview, it was said that the interview was conducted over the phone, so my question is...

Does saying "OMG!" out loud make you as much of a dork as I think it does?

Jury instructions are here: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/jury_instructions.pdf
(via http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/jury-deliberati.html )

Jury instructions are here: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/jury_instructions.pdf
(via http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/jury-deliberati.html )

You are incorrect. This was a civil case, not a criminal one, so first off, the jury didn't decide she was "guilty". What the jury decided was that she infringed on the Plaintiffs' copyrights. Then the jury chose the number of infringing acts, and assigned a value between $750 and $150,000 for each infringement. For whatever reason, the jury went with $9250 for each, or $222k total. Here is the verdict form they used: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/riaa_verdict_form.pdf

As should be clear when you read it, "guilt" is not at issue, only "infringement". You will also see that jury was responsible for the dollar figure.

Yes, Edgar Bronfman, The Warner Music CEO said he was certain his kids downloaded music. But don't worry, he gave them a stern lecture about the music they downloaded... so they won't do it again.

God they have balls. According to this Wired article, the lawyer for the RIAA actually said "This is what can happen if you don't settle.". If that in itself isn't proof that all they are trying to do is extort people, I don't know what is.

"This is what can happen if you don't settle," RIAA attorney Richard Gabriel told reporters outside the courthouse.

Notice how they throw in an impassioned plea to roll over and take it? This court case is nothing about justice - it's an extension to their protection racket. (quote from here)

When, oh when, will somebody step in and nail these guys with a RICO suit?

Well, you'd have to go read the jury instructions. There were two levels: non-willful: 750-30k. If it was willful, then up to 150k. Both willful and non-wilfull are "per song".

verdict form: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/riaa_verdict_form.pdf
instructions: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/jury_instructions.pdf

Well, you'd have to go read the jury instructions. There were two levels: non-willful: 750-30k. If it was willful, then up to 150k. Both willful and non-wilfull are "per song".

verdict form: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/riaa_verdict_form.pdf
instructions: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/files/jury_instructions.pdf

We lost.

I have always been impressed by scientists from Iran and Pakistan. One of my closest friends in graduate school is from Pakistan as was one of my mentors. Also worthy of note: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/04/irans_superconc.html Students from the University of Tehran made concrete that is far stronger than anything designed by American engineers. Mad props to Jay Sappington for telling that story.

Not too sure that they won completely and will continue to win... The BBC radio programme about Al-Hazar University (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/labandmosque.shtml) was interesting in pointing out that the Islamic scientific and religious frameworks do not have to be in opposition and can provide a way forward for each other. This is underlined by Vatican astronomy (see http://www.vaticanobservatory.org/ and http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/10/science-is-trut.html): hopefully The Church has accepted "The Galileo Affair" and moved on...

Quote: "However, unlike many, Cerf doesn't think the bandwidth issues, frequently stated as a potential stumbling block for video over the web, will be a problem. Cerf thinks that a combination of faster connections, improved network technology and not "streaming" content will alleviate any issues."

Seems like he is not engaged in a (recent) startup.

CC.

Like when they spy on you in the airport for having a "bad" book?

I could thing of a few other reasons to boycott.
Corruption has other ways of expressing itself...

water...
http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/2005-07-04-pollution-china-cover_x.htm
land....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6582571.stm
air...
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/01/70107

effect of being there ... Oh hey they noticed... And you thought global warming a disaster... they could at least cut back on the cancer causing shit.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-04/16/content_434747.htm

The problem with bacteria is its ability to adapt - look at the MRSA outbreaks of recent months... worth reading

"You're a douche. That's a douche word. Why don't you just say 'raw material' or something?"
http://www.wired.com/gaming/virtualworlds/magazine/15-09/mf_pennyarcade

At least one of the earlier unlocks required re-soldering inside the phone. That's not like taking your sports car racing on dirt roads, that's like adding a NOS system and asking for warranty support when the engine overheats.

I agree the argument doesn't apply to the software unlocks, but the hardware ones meet your analogy.

"Unauthorized use" might be things like taking your sports care racing on dirt roads.

Depends exactly what chemicals you use in your sinks/laundry. Standard soaps would probably be alright in limited quantities, but i'd be very cautious about bleach or drain cleaners, etc.

The algae might actually thrive from blackwater - Urine is the primary method for removing nitrogen from the body, and feces generally contain nutrients necessary for plants. Considering that algae thrives from nitrogen and phosphorous...

But in the end if you can find a sanitary way to do this, I could envision a method of reducing strain on sewer systems and generating energy. Granted I wouldn't want to ever have to work on repairing a system that contained algae and sewage, all steeping under the sun, day in and out.

I suspect this wouldn't be an option for most people's back yards - certainly not in the more temperate/polar regions, where'd you'd have to worry about keeping snow off it, preventing it from freezing, etc. It may be well suited as something for integration into waste treatment centers though.

All in all the prospects of such a system, if well designed and planned, could probably put a newly built city well on the way to being carbon negative and having an environmental footprint a quarter or less of what a similarly sized city would be (though it probably would take up somewhat more room).

There are multiple interesting ideas and initiatives along this idea, including a green city going up in china http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.05/feat_popup.html , (scroll 3/4 down to hear actual plans for the city) Although I can't find it, there was also a 6 spoke fractal design for transportation, which started as a circle crossed by 6 equidistant spokes, each of which had a circle with 6 spokes, a design which continued for 1-3 iterations. I think for a city of 1 million, point-to-point rail transportation within one of the 6 primary circles was 5 minutes, and within the city as a whole 12 minutes. It didn't scale especially well if you added iteration -1, making the city capable of holding 6 times as many people, but it was still competitive with current systems I believe.

It doesn't matter if you lump them together or not. Quite literally, the rotten apples spoil the barrel. If the threat of lawsuits grows large enough, investors will back away from putting money into wind farms, just like with what happened to nuclear plants.

http://www.windaction.org/
http://www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2005/10/69177
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1189201220164870.xml&coll=1
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=135298&ac=PHnws

Want more examples? Wind power actually does kill thousands of birds every year (many of which are endangered). Not that I think the outrage against wind farms is pretty ridiculous -- a stable and cheap energy supply is a necessary requirement of modern society. Even the most atavistic of greens will be as lost as the rest of us when their local REI store can't open because there's no power in the city.

How about this situation with the Yorktown?

You played Team Fortress 2 years ago? And all this time I thought it was #7 on Wired's 2005 Vaporware list.

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/commentary/circuitcourt/2006/12/72241

The new rule explicitly allows people to circumvent technological protection measures on their cell phones in order to switch carriers and use the phone on a different network.

Was it that hard you couldn't google for this?

Captain Jack Moore, the commander of the 4/9's "Blowtorch" company, peers into his Land Warrior monocle. Inside is a digital map of Tarmiyah, a filthy little town about 25 kilometers north of Baghdad that's become a haven for Islamists.

Some of their MP3s are in fact watermarked, but by the label, not amazon (at least not yet).

http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/09/some-of-amazons.html

"Amazon does not apply watermarks. Files are generally provided to us from the labels and some labels use watermarks to identify the retailer who sold the tracks (there is no information on the tracks that identifies the customer)."

    They say they don't watermark the files, the record company does. So the watermark only indicates the MP3 came from Amazon.com. This link includes a graph showing the waveform differences: http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/09/some-of-amazons.html

I will give your advice back to you: Remember to fact check. The management of the new company called "AT&T" is very different from the more trustworthy company that was AT&T. That's the point. Should Apple have partnered with that new company? I think not.

Why do I think that? Apple will get criticism for everything bad the new "AT&T" does. For example, see the August 23, 2007 article AT&T Ditches 'Fewest Dropped Calls' Ad Campaign, which was apparently fraudulent. This article notes that AT&T's new slogan, "more bars in more places", seems to be exactly the same claim, in different language: AT&T Drops 'Fewest Dropped Calls' Claim.

To understand the new management, consider the history. For $16 Billion SBC got AT&T's VOIP customers, and the AT&T name. Quote from the Business Week: "It isn't clear whether or not AT&T CEO David Dorman, who will earn about $20 million from the sale of AT&T, will stick around."

So, a manager who presided over the failure of his company made $30 million (not $20 million) from selling the company to other managers who are reputed to be just as inept.

The Wikipedia article says, "Dorman's management finesse can be ascertained by tracking the value of AT&T stock during his tenure." Dorman became president in 2000, Wikipedia says. The stock performance tanked beginning just before that, and continued down until the AT&T name was sold to SBC.

It looks from the stock quotes that AT&T is doing well now, but apparently that is only because the AT&T name was pasted on a new company. (It's like unscrewing the radiator cap and driving a different car underneath. That's not real car repair.)

That's Apples new partner. Does that seem like a partner that will enhance a reputation?

Results 1 - 20 of about 745,000 for "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0"

First hit:
That's the so-called "Processing Key" that unlocks the heart of every HD-DVD disk to date. Happy Valentine's day, AACS. AACS, a DRM scheme used to encrypt data on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray disks, would appear to be cracked wide open by that short string of hexadecimal codes

The MPAA sent out a ton of DMCA take-down notices attempting to censor that number, but of course "Results 1 - 20 of about 745,000" just demonstrates the stupidity of even attempting to censor a number (or anything else) trying to get DRM to work. Not to mention another 418,000 hits for "09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0" and a few thousand hits for the decimal version 13256278887989457651018865901401704640.

That number is arguably a criminal circumvention device under the DMCA, and it is potentially "criminal trafficking" for you to tell that number to anyone.

-

It's definitely than legal. You don't have to apply the apple update your phone. THAT's your contract with apple -- if you want apple to continue to support your phone, you have to play by their rules. This is EXACTLY what defective by design is all about, and I honestly don't understand the bitching about it. Apple was very clear from day one that they could do this, and they were making a device that was designed to make them money. I completely don't approve of it, and I did not buy an Iphone for exactly these reasons. But Apple was completely upfront about it. They made it very clear in their press releases, etc, that they would lock the device down, force users to buy ring tones through ITMS, not allow 3rd party development, and would seek to monetize EVERY aspect of the Iphone they could.

If you want to hack up the device to use it the way you want, fine and dandy, but if you want apple to keep upgrading it after you've hacked it, that's unrealistic, and as much as I really dislike the controls Apple has placed on what would be a great device if you could do what you want with it, I don't think it's fair to complain about them doing EXACTLY what they said they would do before the device came out. Apple is releasing updates under the premise that they know the condition of everything important on the brick -- er phone. If things have changed, unbeknownst to them, they are not responsible for what happens when you do updates.

As for it being legal for you to unlock your phone -- it COMPLETELY is -- that right is guaranteed to you by the DMCA. But once you do that, you are taking a risk still running apple updates. And as much as I dislike what apple has done with the Iphone, I don't think you can say what they are doing here is unfair. They told us all a long time ago that the device was going to be as locked down as possible. People who bought it, knew that. Or at least the people who bought it and applied the hacks.

Anyway, simply put, if a game isn't good, it doesn't sell well. Halo 3 is big deal for one reason, both Halo and Halo 2 were great games. Halo 2 in particular is renowned for its incredibly well made multiplayer.

In addition Halo 3 has 2 and 4 player coop, offline and online. Full gameplay recording, both single and multi, which can be played back with slowmo, free camera etc. It also has the inbuilt garrys mod style editor: "Forge". Which can even be used during a multiplayer game.

As for myself, i've been gaming since I was around 7 years old (1990) and have played pretty much every great FPS there is, including doom, doom 2, quake 1,2,3, half life 1,2, RTCW, Deus Ex, System Shock, Bioshock, The original marathons 1,2, Chronicles of Riddick, Goldeneye and probably a lot more I can't remember.

I actually much preferred Halo 2 to Half-Life 2. And indeed, so little did I care for Half Life 2's story that I didn't even complete that particular game. With Halo however, I actually care about the characters and want to know what happens. That's why I enjoyed halo and halo 2. Sure the environments repeated a bit and the story isn't totally incredibly original, but what Halo does well is the basic gameplay and "30 seconds of fun" is *surprise* incredibly fun.

But of course, all those magazines and websites who are rating Halo 3 so well are all wrong. And you mr Internet man are obviously correct.

Because the record for a Cadmium Telluride cell was at approximately 16% in 2001. Six years later they are ready to manufacture a 11% efficient cell, and we're supposed to think this is progress ?

Fair enough. My sources are as follows. However, not a single one of them is from this article. And since they obviously contradict it, it would seem that there is NOT a unanimous agreement as to what happened.

The object, Woodman said, was metallic in nature and created a crater 42 feet wide and 15 feet deep. The impact also registered a 1.5-magnitude tremor on the institute's seismic equipment.Ronald Woodman is the director of the Peruvian Geophysical Institute.

Mid sized meteorites are not hot. I'll say it again: Mid sized meteorites are not hot. First, meteoroids are naturally cold. They've been out in the frigid blackness of space for many billions of years -- these rocks are cold down to their very center. Second, because of its size there's a good chance that this meteorite was originally part of a larger meteor that broke up anywhere between 60 and 30km above the surface. If that is the case, the larger meteor's cold interior would become the smaller meteor's cold exterior. Since hardly any surface heating takes place lower than about 30km, this cold surface doesn't warm up by any appreciable amount. Some meteorites, located soon after landing, have actually been reported to have frost on the surface due to their still cold interior.

There 'preliminary' analysis quoted in this article is contradicted by the following; In addition, Woodman stated that astrophysicist José Ishitsuka of Peru's Geophysics Institute, had collected samples of the meteorite and had confirmed that it contained a high degree of iron. It was reported that Ishitsuka retrieved a 3-inch magnetic fragment of the meteorite and has based his conclusion after studying its properties.

What I am attempting to say, is that there is NOT any 'proof' as to what this was, at least not yet. And to simply accept the explination that it was a meteor without the evidence to support it, is not acceptable in any scientific attempt at explaining what happened here. In time, it may be 'proven' to be a meteorite. But that time is not now. It is merely 'speculation' that is a meteorite. Lots of things that fall from space can have a 'high degree of iron', some of them are manmade.

Sony, for the love of all that is holy please have your right hand talking to your life hand.

http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/09/kaz-hirai-plays.html

Please please please adopt some consistent marketing and executive speak.

" Similar trials are being conducted in other places. Exact numbers are hard to ascertain, but it's estimated that fewer than 50 patients in North America are walking around with wires in their brain.""

And there's a magazine just for these people.

You are holding up a single method of mining as representitive of the entire industry.

In the Appalachian mountains much of the coal mining is done by Mountaintop Removal. Here's Google's case study on Appalachian Mountaintop Removal. Mountaintop removal has been used in the Appalachians for 20 years under a cloud of legal and regulatory confusion. "In just two decades, hundreds of mountaintops, more than a thousand miles of stream, and hundreds of square miles of forests have been obliterated by the practice. Opponents say the pollution is also dangerous to people who live in the region." So it's not simply one wiki article as you make it out to be.